|
Innovations
and Practices
Policing
Performance Assessment Framework
Policing
as a service has changed its complexion over the years. In
the Commonwealth, more and more police forces are trying to
orient themselves favourably towards the police by creating
new frameworks which make them more accessible and efficient.
This article will delineate the nuances of the Policing Performance
Assessment Framework (PPAF) in function in the United Kingdom.
Introduction
|
The
Policing Performance Assessment Framework is about "policing"
as a whole and is designed to reflect the breadth of
modern policing. It is not only about the contribution
of the police in isolation but also about the contribution
of local communities and other organisations.
In
addition to focusing on operational effectiveness, PPAF
provides measures of satisfaction plus overall trust
and confidence in the police, as well as measures that
put performance into context in terms of efficiency
and organisational capability. In line with the Government's
desire to enhance policing accountability at a local
level, performance against national and local priorities
are reflected in the framework.
More
specifically, PPAF also concentrates in achieving the
key priorities stipulated in the National Policing Plans.
These include providing a citizen focused service to
the public, tackling anti-social behaviour and disorder,
continuing to reduce crime in line with the Government's
Public Service Agreements, combating serious/organised
crime, and narrowing the justice gap.
|
UK
Police
Source:
Google /images
|
The
Rationale
The
PPAF was mainly developed to devise ways of improving policing
performance in general plus police performance in particular
since:
- Authorities/forces
can assess, compare and improve their own performance;
- Good
practice can be identified and disseminated;
- Problems
or weaknesses can be addressed.
Areas
of Intervention
The
PPAF data aims to bring about improvement in policing by:
Lessening
crime and disorder;
Improving response time;
Conducting better investigation;
Bringing more offenders to justice;
Providing greater reassurance;
Lessening fear of crime;
Increasing
efficiency.
Development
of PPAF
The
initiative is led by the Home Office, with the support of
the Association of Chief Police Officers and the Association
of Police Authorities. Within the Home Office the work is
overseen by the Police Standards Unit. The Assessment Framework
is a list of 13 statutory performance indicators (SPIs) introduced
by the Police Authorities Performance Indicators Order 2004.
There are five 'key criterias' which require PPAF measures
to be:
- Strategically
relevant;
- Directionally
unambiguous;
- Attributable
to policing;
- Clearly
defined; and
- Cost
effective.
The
two basic domains under which the PPAF works are:
(a) Citizen focus - This domain determines aspects of performance
and measures the level of satisfaction with service delivery
as well as trust and confidence enjoyed by the police.
Some
of the priorities set nationally and locally include:
-
Reducing crime - where police activity helps to prevent
and reduce crime.
-
Investigating crime - where police activity solves crime
and brings offenders to justice.
-
Promoting public safety - where police activity promotes
public safety and reduces anti-social behaviour.
-
Providing assistance - where police respond to general requests
for assistance and support.
(b)
Resource Use - This domain determines the level of resources
available and how they are deployed to achieve the performance
indicators above.
The
13 indicators against which policing performance is measured
includes:
User
satisfaction measures
1.
Satisfaction of victims of domestic burglary, violent crime,
vehicle crime and road traffic collisions with respect to
-
(a)
making contact with the police;
(b) action taken by the police;
(c) being kept informed of progress;
(d) their treatment by staff;
(e) the overall service provided.
Confidence
measures
2.
Using the British Crime Survey, the percentage of people who
think their local police do a good job.
Fairness
and equality measures
3.
Satisfaction of victims of racists incidents with respect
to the overall service provided.
Comparison
of satisfaction for white users and users from visible minority
ethnic groups with respect to the overall service provided.
Percentage of searches which lead to arrest by ethnicity of
the person stopped.
Comparison of percentage detected of violence against the
person offences by ethnicity of the victim.
Measures
of crime level
4.
Using the British Crime Survey -
a)
the risk of personal crime; and
b) the risk of household crime
5.
a) Domestic burglaries per 1000 households.
b) Violent crime per 1000 population.
c) Robberies per 1000 population.
d) Vehicle crime per 1000 population.
e) Life threatening crime and gun crime per 1000 population.
Offences
brought to justice measures
6.
a) Number of notifiable/recorded offences resulting in conviction,
caution or taken into consideration at court.
b) Percentage of notifiable/recorded offences resulting in
conviction, caution or taken into consideration at court.
c) Number of Class A drug supply offences brought to justice
per 10,000 population; of these the percentage each for cocaine
and heroin supply.
Detection
measures
7.
a) Percentage of notifiable/recorded offences resulting in
charge, summons, caution or taken into consideration at court.
b) Percentage detected of domestic burglaries.
c) Percentage detected of violent crime.
d) Percentage detected of robberies.
e) Percentage detected of vehicle crime.
Enforcement
measures
8.
a) Percentage of domestic violence incidents with a power
of arrest where an arrest was made related to the incident.
b) The percentage of partner-on-partner violence.
Traffic
measures
9.
a) Road traffic collisions resulting in death or serious personal
injury per 100 million vehicle kilometres travelled.
Quality
of life measures
10.
Using the British Crime Survey -
a) fear of crime; and
b) feelings of public safety
11.
a) Proportion of police officer time available for frontline
policing.
12.
a) Proportion of police recruits from minority ethnic groups
compared to the proportion of people from minority ethnic
groups in the economically active population.
b) Ratio of officers from minority ethnic groups resigning
to all officer resignations.
c) Percentage of female police officers compared to overall
force strength.
13.
a) Number of working hours lost due to sickness by police
officers.
b) Number of working hours lost due to sickness by police
staff.
Police
Performance Monitoring Reports
The
first set of performance monitors was published in February
2003. For the first time, these allowed the public to gain
a rounded view of the achievements of their local force across
a number of areas of policing business in relation to similar
forces elsewhere in the country. The 'performance monitor'
diagrams provided a quick, visual summary representation of
the balance of performance for a force.
|
